Wednesday, March 9, 2011

Big Al lets down South Belfast

A couple of weeks ago, over at Open Unionism, I pointed out the tangible difference in performance between the DUP’s double mandaters and those who regarded being an MP at our nation’s real parliament as a full-time job.

Just to prove that difference isn’t just isolated to the DUP, compare and contrast Alasdair McDonnell’s woeful effort with that of his party colleague, Mark Durkan:

Alasdair McDonnell (Social Democratic and Labour Party MP for Belfast South, Social Democratic and Labour Party MLA for Belfast South)

· Has spoken in 11 debates in the last year — well below average amongst MPs.
· Has received answers to 4 written questions in the last year — well below average amongst MPs.
· Has voted in 28% of votes in this Parliament with this affiliation — well below average amongst MPs. (From Public Whip)


Mark Durkan (Social Democratic and Labour Party MP for Foyle, Former Social Democratic and Labour Party MLA for Foyle)

· Has spoken in 74 debates in the last year — well above average amongst MPs.
· Has received answers to 8 written questions in the last year — below average amongst MPs.
· Has voted in 68% of votes in this Parliament with this affiliation — below average amongst MPs. (From Public Whip)


OK, as a nationalist, the question of treating the United Kingdom’s parliament with respect won’t be such an issue for McDonnell as it should be with pro-Union MPs… but how about treating his constituents, the people who actually elected him as MP, with a bit more respect?


Once again, thanks to "They Work for You" for the relevant data.


6 comments:

Anonymous said...

Since when does being in Westminster mean you are a better MP

I think the electorate of Northern Ireland would prefer their MPs to spend more time looking after them in their constituencies than in Westminster. Being there is not the measure of ability or effectiveness.

You need to get to work on real blogging and quit the lazy "look at my stats" style, which proves more about your pedancy than political nous.

O'Neill said...

"Since when does being in Westminster mean you are a better MP"

Clue is in the second part of that title, "MP".

Do you regard being an MP as a full-time job?
Do you regard being an MLA as full-time job?
Does Parliament and the assembly deal with the same business?

Anonymous said...

You still haven't answered the question, just sent some enigmatic pointer to the clue being in the 2nd part of the question. My point still remains. Ask the electorate; they voted for him, not some statistic hungry wannabe blogger who can't come up with decent blog material. If you really want to know what an MP does, try asking him/her, their staff, and the people who come into their offices looking for help. I am sure they would have a different opinion.
Whether they have a duty to be in Westminster for every debate, or even most of them when they rarely have any impact on the Norn Iron folk is a moot point. They are elected to represent what the electorate want. Your point about attendance is rather pathetic. It focuses on profile at Westminster and not effectiveness in their constituency.
Maybe you should run for MP next time on the banner that you will spend most of your time in London, in nice surroundings, looking and feeling important, and ensuring you get a lot of questions in, attendance in, and one or two expenses in!

Let's have a decent blog, not some witchunt of many of our excellent MPs here in Northern Ireland. If you don't like them, that's fine, but try to be a bit more intelligent, with less sadly opinionated and very misleading spin.

Regarding whether MPs are part time, perhaps here we might need to look at the full remit of representation and the appropriate allocated time to such activities. Now, that would be a good blog. Should MPs in Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales be full time if most of the work and representation undertaken by their colleagues in England are now being done by their respective Assemblies?
Does that mean that double jobbing is not really an issue, but those who are double jobbing are really regressing to what they did when we had Direct Rule and no MLAs?

They don't get two salaries

O'Neill said...

Let's have a decent blog, not some witchunt of many of our excellent MPs here in Northern Ireland.

Set up your own blog and fireaway, I don't do requests.

Should MPs in Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales be full time if most of the work and representation undertaken by their colleagues in England are now being done by their respective Assemblies?


OK, take that point to its logical conclusion- that means a MLA position should be full-time?

Anonymous said...

Of course you don't do requests. Your blogs are a bit egocentric anyhow. You are admitting that you are masquerading as a blogger? Seems like it. As for MLA a full time position, you talk about logical conclusion. Let me spell it out simply using simple words and something you might understand:

Let's say the whole apple pie is all the work. Assemblies have taken about 3/4 of the pie as they want to eat that, leaving only the original London Pie people with 1/4. That anology although rather basic would suggest that they are all working less than the whole, but, MLAs get less, and there are 6 to a constituency, not one.

O'Neill said...

You seem to be arguing (if I understand your complicated analogy correctly) that we should now be happy to regard our elected representatives as in fact part-timers?

Regarding salaries, what is the going rate for a MLA at the minute? Bearing in mind there are 108 of them )for a population of less than 2 mill)theoretically eating only 3/4 of the pie, do you think we are getting good value?